Amazon closes on Apple in the race to trillion-dollar market cap

“In the battle for the first company to reach and sustain $1 trillion in stock market value, don’t count out a come-from-behind victory,” Shira Ovide writes for Bloomberg.

“Apple Inc. has had a lock on its spot as the world’s most valuable public company by stock value for several years, and we’ve been waiting for it to crest the $1 trillion market cap milestone. The company inched within $50 billion of that mark in early June before its share price retreated a bit,” Ovide writes. “Amazon, though, is coming up fast.”

“At the beginning of this year, Apple’s stock market value was 50 percent bigger than Amazon’s. Now the gap is about 10 percent. The spread between the two companies was about $85 billion as of Friday’s U.S. market close,” Ovide writes. “That is a big but not insurmountable gap if Amazon keeps up its torrid stock gains. In 2018 alone, the value of Amazon’s shares has climbed $260 billion.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: One question:

How much would Apple Inc. be worth today had a Jeff Bezos-type CEO taken over the reins instead?MacDailyNews, November 21, 2017

Amazon moves closer to overtaking Apple as most valuable U.S. company – April 27, 2018


  1. Does MDN think CEOs like Jeff Bezos grow on treees? He, like Steve Jobs, is a generational talent. If he was to die or step down, Amazon would also have trouble replacing him.

    1. Did MDN say they thought CEOs like Bezos grow on trees?

      No. They did not.

      MDN simply asked a very simple question. Why do you sound upset about it? Is it because you know that Tim Cook is really just a boring, visionless caretaker and that Apple could do better, yet you hold some affinity for TC, perhaps due to his incessant SJW virtue-signaling?

      Regardless of the rarity of talent, Apple could certainly have a CEO who managed to keep all of his company’s product lines up-to-date, at the very least. Even a run-of-the-mill CEO would be able to competently manage that.

      If Steve Jobs reincarnated and saw Apple’s top-of-the-line Mac was still being sold despite being 5 years old, he’d drop dead again instantly.

      1. Certainly it would be nice to have one who led from the front both inside and outside the company creating new products and services rather than waiting to see if others can make a go of it and then play catch up with mixed results that usually costs more in the long run anyway.

    1. Absolutely so for 5 years the company needed the perception that it was in safe hands but now it needs a new creative force or at least one far better than Cook in that department. Trouble is safety first has become daren’t take a risk and ironically many a company was destroyed by Apple during its great revival.

    2. Amazon owns Wall Street’s heart, mind and soul. Apple is already seen as a has-been company and that in itself is really sad for loyal shareholders. Everything Amazon does is seen as perfect while everything Apple does is seen as some screw-up. Supposedly, both Google and Microsoft are going to pass Apple in overall value and all hope will be gone for Apple’s comeback. Apple should really have gotten into the cloud business where money flows like water.

    3. Why? He’s a megalomaniac, fueling a monopoly, and what’s to be admired in his likely legacy? Biggest and most powerful appeals to me like, meh. No, I’m not saying he’s not a brilliant and savvy biz-man, but if I could chose his or SJ’s legacy related to creative/inventive leadership, there’d be no question. Maybe I should be more appreciative of personal assistants sold in “3-packs” that likely gain too much personal info, AWS supporting the military, and his creating a work place that sounds like a bit of a hell hole?
      Meanwhile TC has the originality of a limp fish and he’s often sidetracked with the notion it’s up to him to change the world, but at least he’s not proactively wrecking AAPL’s ethos, like I image Bezos would.

      1. I agree with most of your post except maybe Cook “not proactively wrecking AAPL’s ethos,”

        I sort of doubt Steve Jobs would have a 2013 built Mac like the Mac Pro , a flagship machine, being sold as ‘new’ in 2018 on Apple’s webpage, it breaks his ethos of ‘the best’ the world. If people think it’s a fluke we also got a 2014 Mac Mini…
        Imagine a car dealership trying to sell you a 2013 car as ‘new’ today, that’s how far Apple’s ‘ethos’ has fallen. Job’s whole attitude of ‘perfection’ of products has if not fallen has at least eroded. (Jobs corrected mistakes like the hockey puck mouse very quickly compared to issues that can linger for years today).

        Steve Job’s aapl ethos was also stringently ‘non political etc’ and strongly ‘corporate’, i.e focusing on products. Compare his interviews with Cooks, Jobs always focused just on products (nobody can really tell what his political views were).

        Jobs didn’t even want Apple to contribute to charities except matching staffers contributions as THINKING about WHICH charities (which political movement, which social cause) to contribute was a distraction (and probably divisive). (Jobs was not anti charity as he gave privately with his wife) . He didn’t want to celebrate Apple’s 30 anniversary etc as it also was a ‘distraction’. etc. Compare it today Apple going whole hog into all kinds of ‘celebrations’ even external, actively engaging on political stands, often with the barest connection to Apple’s business.

        I can go on but you get the gist.

  2. With Tim Cook staying in charge I don’t think there’s any doubt Amazon will be first to the trillion dollar mark.

    Not being able to monetize across their entire device line, in particular Macs, by keeping them up to date, correctly designed and hugely desirable has only resulted in far fewer sales than they might have had and shooting themselves in the foot. Here I sit 3-4 years past the point I was ready to buy the Mac Pro I wanted, not the one they delivered. And I certainly am not alone. No reason they can’t actually innovate on reasons to buy a Mac even for PC users to increase profits. You pursue the opposite tack of not thinking the day of the Mac is over but innovate huge reasons why it is not.

    On top of that poor delivery execution of other devices (like Homepod) and software update lagging behind allowing new functionality have hurt their reputation. And as Captain Obvious would say Tim is not the visionary Steve was.

    Sadly recent events revealing their blatant lack of attentiveness and prolonged update times have made even the most previously hopeful of us despair.

    1. “With Tim Cook staying in charge I don’t think there’s any doubt Amazon will be first to the trillion dollar mark.”

      I read the headline before reading the story and my first thought exactly.

      Apple sells one or two dozen products (guessing) in different configurations. How many products does Amazon sell that fit all consumer needs?

      Not a stock expert, but I fail to see what the recent record buybacks accomplish.

      I read the PE ratio of both companies as well as the profits in the same quarter and fail to see how much that matters, as well.

      Also, Apple sitting on a RECORD cash pile does not seem to move the needle. Too cautious and agree with MDN if a mercurial leader like Bezos was in charge — “to the moon, Alice!”

      As much as I would like to see Apple as the first trillion dollar company, with a wooden caretaker CEO, I just don’t see it happening, sorry…

  3. As unsettling as it is, as far as Wall Street is concerned, Amazon, in terms of growth potential, has already passed Apple a year ago. Apple isn’t as hungry as Amazon is and that’s the end of it for loyal Apple shareholders. I well remember the Apple bulls making fun of Amazon’s scarce profitability while Bezos poured money into Amazon for growth. In a short while, Amazon will soon pass Apple in overall value because Apple had no interest in growing its business in leaps and bounds through major acquisitions.

    It has been basically Apple’s decision to lose to Amazon by buying back shares. The more shares that disappear, the harder it will be for Apple to reach $1T market cap. Everyone knows big investors would rather pay 10X for Amazon shares than what they would pay for Apple shares.

    I’m a loyal long-term Apple shareholder but I know this year I’m going to have to watch Amazon surpass Apple in overall wealth when there was no reason for that to happen if Apple had been more diligent about growing the company.

    1. Amazon’s “value” is an illusion. Apple has 30% higher revenue and 1,600% higher profits than Amazon in 2017. Apple quite literally made 16 times more money than Amazon!

      Given its business model, Amazon can’t make enough profit in the next 100 years to justify its market cap.

        1. Exactly right and it’s interesting that Apple is suffering the same negative perceptions as President Trump. Brought to you by BIASED MEDIA that can’t handle the truth …

  4. This is hardly a meaningful comparison when Apple’s shares are valued with a P/E ratio of 18, while Amazon’s have a P/E ratio of 212!

    Looking at 2017 revenue and profit, Amazon took in $177B with just $3B in profit, while Apple’s revenue was $230B with $48B in profit. I really don’t understand what’s driving the crazy valuation of Amazon stock. It would take 300 years of profits to justify Amazon’s market cap!

    1. Breadth of services, brand stickiness and that fact that many large companies including Apple depend on Amazon’s cloud services are major contributing factors to Amazon being ‘valued’ so high.

  5. Amazon is an interesting and flashy company. Is it really worth its market cap??? If people start worrying about Amazon developing anti-gravity or teleportation… then its share value will be a race to the bottom.

    I like Amazon but my stock money stays with Apple.

    1. I suppose we can look at it another way. If we used the same amount of money to buy shares in each company how large a portion of the company would our shares represent?

      At today’s market close AMZN cost $1713.78/share to AAPL cost of $187.18/share. Basically we would be purchasing about 9.16 AAPL shares to 1 of AMZN to compare like to like. AMZN has 485M outstanding shares to AAPL with 4.92B. This works out to owning about 1/485M of AMZN vs 1/537M of AAPL. AMZN stock appears to represent a ‘better’ deal per US$ if you are looking at it that way.

  6. Jet Bezos would have had Apple racing to the bottom competing with all the Android manufacturers with 1% profits. He would not have been the right fit for Apple. Amazon is the darling of Wallstreet. Wallstreet was never going to let Apple get to the trillion mark first.

  7. All of you Tim Cook bashers do realizer that when Steve Jobs died AAPL was worth $55.02. Under Tim Cook it is now $187.16. That is nearly a four fold increase. I know many of you think Steve Jobs is still doing spectacular things for AAPL beyond the grave, but it has been Tim Cook’s company for the last 6 and 3/4 years. Jobs was great for Apple and Cook has been far greater for AAPL. I loved what Steve did so much that I bought a ton of his products, loved them and invested in AAPL. I did well with Steve. With Tim I have done spectacularly well and I still love my AAPL products even more. Isn’t it time to stop bashing the financial wizard at the helm of Apple and driving the engine of AAPL?

    1. “Jobs was great for Apple and Cook has been far greater for AAPL.”

      Yeah, you’re dreaming please wake up. If Steve was still around he would have quadrupled Apple’s success in so many areas too numerous to list. Cook is riding the iPhone money train and not much more …

    2. ” Jobs was great for Apple and Cook has been far greater for AAPL”

      this simply not true.

      when Jobs returned in 1996 aapl was worth less than $1.
      when he died like you said it was around $55.
      That’s a FIFTY time increase vs 4 times Tim cook.
      Even if you adjust for the number of years Jobs aapl growth rate far far overshadows Cooks.

      Also probably 95% of Apple’s profits come from products created under Jobs. Go look at the financials, Watch and AirPods although good products make almost nothing relatively. Not even as much as Macs by billions of dollars (Macs make nearly twice Other Products which includes Beats, AirPods, Watch, iPods etc ).

      1. “when Jobs returned in 1996 aapl was worth less than $1.
        when he died like you said it was around $55. That’s a FIFTY time increase vs 4 times Tim Cook.”


        “Also probably 95% of Apple’s profits come from products created under Jobs.”

        Those two excellent points say it ALL when you compare the two CEOs.

        In addition, as well as under Cook all the late products, short supply at launch, neglected and almost left for dead (MacPro), discontinued exceptional products (Airport), discontinued exceptional software (Aperture), neutered pro software (Final Cut Pro) and for the first time I no longer upgrade software immediately like I did in the past and felt good about it on day one.

        Do your homework fanboys and don’t let the shiny objects or the market money distract you from the inevitable — Apple needs very badly a creative visionary CEO that can keep the insane ideas flowing and the trains running on time …

      2. There were some stock splits along the way so you may need to recalculate. I think there were 2-for-1 stock splits in 2000 and 2005 during SJ as CEO and and a 7-for-1 split in 2014 after his passing. Roughly that works out to better than 200x increase for SJ and 25x (to date) for TC.

        1. my data (if i’m not mistaken) is split and dividend adjusted. Stock adjusted was in1996 about 60 cents going to 50 cents in 97, approx (reading a chart so is approx)
          jobs returned in 96 i believe got to be CEO in 97 (?),
          anyhow even if i’m off i know SJ’s aapl performance was better than Cooks.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.